joewarkfanclub

This is just absolute bullshit.

I absolutely agree that we should wear what we wish. My objection to this kit has nothing to day with Rangers or Celtic. My objection is based on its association with an organisation that discirminates against a large section of our society.

You dont like a Motherwell kit without a claret band. So I think Im allowed to object to one with an amber sash if I feel like it.

Not sure what definition of bigotry you are using, but happy to be enlightened....

Really enjoyed that today. Cant beat an away day at a ground you havent been to before. Its part of what I like about this League Cup format, especially now they have done away with the regionalisation. Cracking wee oldskool ground. As for the game, very competent performance and we strolled it without really hitting the heights. The youngsters all aquitted themselves well. Wilson and Ross both looked steady enough and composed on the ball. Lennon Miller looks the real deal and took his goal really well. Young Ferrie looked sharp when he came on as well. It may well have been lower league opposition, but they all looked streets ahead of the youngsters in the Elgin team. Was interesting to see SOD start on the right of the back 3 and I didnt think he looked out of place at all. Blaney looks assured on the ball and even big Bevis had a decent game, albeit he was never really put under any pressure. I really like big Obika. I know he isnt very good in the air for a man his height, but he is a very tidy footballer with the ball at his feet and once he and Wilkinson get to know each other, I think there could be a partnership there. Glad he got his goal 2nd half to make up for the one he missed in the first. Wilkinson had a pretty quiet game, but there will be plenty more to come from him. Overall, a very good day at the office. Lots of room for improvement, but job done. Same again on Tuesday please.

If you cant see the difference between that and the new kit, then there is no explaining it. We live in the West of Scotland. I dont care about upsetting Celtic fans, but I dont want to be associated with an orange sash......

http://historicalkits.co.uk/Scottish_Football_League/Motherwell/images/change-kits/motherwell-1973-1975-change.gif

Your link doesnt work....

The big problem with your argument is that none of the above was the players fault. They were victims of circumstance. As such they didnt take any action that was fellonious. Therefore they didnt steal anything.

Not a fan of this kit at all. Im not against a sash on our kit in general, I like South American styling, the same way I have loved the Italian styling of recent kits, but this one just hits all the wrong marks.

I think Danzakis situation was a little different in that he didnt speak the language, it was a different culture, he got injured and ended up so far out of the picture that its easy to see why he would be demoralised. Add in a change of manager who wants to play a style you dont fit in to, then that has to be tough for any player. Good to see that SK isnt shirking tough decisions though. You dont want to see anyone thrown under the bus, but by the same token we cant afford to be a charity either. Glad a compromise has been reached that allows both parties to move on.

There is the other side of the coin to consider as well. Some of our fans have lost their heads over giving extended contracts to some of our youth players who didnt progress as we would have liked. Maguire is the most obvious example. There have been others. Given Max had only played a couple of first team games before he went to Cove, it could still have been considered a bit of a risk to offer him extended terms good enough to get him to sign. Take Hastie as an example. Went out to Alloa, had a good loan, came back, had a purple patch, left for a development fee and has done nothing since.

Looking forward to this one. Making the journey up mostly because its another League ground to tick off the list, but also the brother in law stays up there so free digs! No excuses here. Our squad may still be threadbare and it is early season, but we still have more resources than them and they havent played any competitive games either. Just win.

Again subtle messaging from SK. He never said we tried to sign him. Im paraphrasing, but he said, "he is the kind of character I love to have in our dressing room, but we werent able to make an offer to Mikel that would encourage him to stay." You can take them to mean the same thing, or you could also interpret it to say, " we only had enough money to sign 1 big guy to lead the line and hold the ball up so we signed Obika".

I think its all just subtle messaging. Some clubs /agents will think we have money to spend off the back of KVV and Max moving on, not to mention the wages we got off the books. We need to try and make it clear why thats not the case so they dont think they can wring more cash out of us for the players we are interested in. Its also not rocket science that if we are signing players we need to move on those surplus to requirement in order to keep our finances on an even keel and get the biggest bang for our buck. So whilst we dont have a lot of money to throw around. Its safe to say there will be players coming in and more going out.....

I can see both sides of the debate. I think there will always be a risk attached to the players we are able to sign. But that being the case we need to be even more careful with the money we do spend. We cant afford to be wasteful with just throwing enough shit at the wall that some sticks. Just look at the last transfer window. No one would argue that we werent in big trouble, but we signed 9 players. Blaney, Butcher, Casey, Furlong, Aitchison, Mandron, Obika, Crankshaw, Danzaki. How many actually contributed in changing the course of our season? Obviously Hammell got emptied just after we signed all these players, so thats a factor. But realistically Aitchison, Crankshaw and Danzaki offered nothing. Obika was injured for most of it and Blaney only played towards the end when Butcher got injured. Its difficult right now because we are still dealing with the damage of having had 3 managers in one season and sorting out all the contractual situations. But we need to be running a smaller squad of better quality suplemented by good youth players to make a significant impact on the league. I still think we can have a good season, but it will be in spite of our current position not because of it.

I dont pretend to understand how these things work, however, there is no way Danzaki is walking away from a 2.5 year deal without a significant pay off. But the club are not going to pay up his contract in full as that would be of no benefit to us whatsoever. Maybe given a years salary to walk away now and find a new club. Unless of course they have gone down the disciplinary route and he has been unable to hit certain benchmarks to prove he was capable of fullfilling his role and he has been paid off? Is that even possible in the football world?

My first Motherwell. Been addicted ever since. What a team.

Aye, I guess a football detox is maybe as important for our mental health as a digital detox! Maybe I need to take golf back up again! 😆😆😆

The older I get the less I worry, and the less I become effected by results. Conversely, the more I care about the club. Its a weird paradox. No idea what that means is going on in my head! 😆

I may regret saying this, but...... Thank christ the fitbas back next weekend!

You may well be right. The only problem with that is none of us knows. Considering we are supposed to be a fan owned club, thats a concern.

My interest in Wimbledon ended last night! 😪

Ah! Cheers for clearing that up. I understand now. We also reportedly still had £4.5m in the bank from player sales. Now, I get that as a fan owned club we cant go pissing that against the wall and we need to be fiscally prudent, especially after the car crash of last season, but I wouldnt have thought we were on our arse just yet?

I guess cause the insurance went into completing work we wouldnt have otherwise done, so wasnt absorbed into the running costs (as the purpose of the loan didnt allow for that) and therefore didnt assist with cashflow?